Differences in growth and physiological and metabolic responses among Canadian native and hybrid willows (Salix spp.) under salinity stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, soil salinization is becoming increasingly prevalent, due to local hydrogeologic phenomena, climate change and anthropogenic activities. This has significantly curtailed current world food production and limits future production potential. In the prairie region of North America, sulfate salts, rather than sodium chloride, are often the predominant cause of soil degradation. In order to amend soil quality, revegetate salt-affected sites and recover economic loss associated with soil salinization, the establishment of short-rotation coppice plantations with willows (Salix spp.) has been suggested as a possible solution. To screen for the best candidates for such an application, 20 hybrid and 16 native willow genotypes were treated with three different salt conditions for 3 months. The treatments were designed to reflect the salt composition and concentrations on North American prairies. Under moderate salinity treatment (7 dS m-1), hybrid willows had better growth, as they established quickly while managing salt transport and mineral nutrition balance. However, native willows showed higher potential for long-term survival under severe salinity treatment (14 dS m-1), showing a lower sodium:potassium ratio in roots and better photosynthetic performance. Two native willow genotypes with high osmotic and salinity tolerance indices, specifically LAR-10 and MJW-9, are expected to show superior potential for remediating salt-affected sites. In addition, we observed significantly higher sulfate/sulfur concentrations in both leaf and root tissues in response to the severe salinity treatment, shedding light on the effect of sulfate salinity on sulfate uptake, and potentially sulfur metabolism in plants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".